scholarly journals Efficacy Of 100 Mg SC Mepolizumab For Severe Eosinophilic Asthma (SEA) Across Blood Eosinophil Counts: Meta-Analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 143 (2) ◽  
pp. AB101 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven W. Yancey ◽  
Frank Albers ◽  
Daniel J. Bratton ◽  
Eric S. Bradford ◽  
Namhee Kwon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Blood Eosinophil ◽  
Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Severe Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Eosinophil Counts

Reslizumab and mepolizumab for moderate-to-severe poorly controlled asthma: an indirect comparison meta-analysis

Immunotherapy ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (17) ◽  
pp. 1491-1505 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Yan ◽  
Chakrapani Balijepalli ◽  
Rohini Sharma ◽  
Stephane Barakat ◽  
Shawn X Sun ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Indirect Comparison ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Severe Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Global Initiative For Asthma ◽  
Credible Intervals ◽  
Global Initiative ◽  
Eosinophil Counts

Aim: A systematic literature review and network meta-analysis assessed the efficacy and safety of reslizumab 3.0 mg/kg and mepolizumab 100 mg. Materials & methods: Eligible studies evaluated reslizumab and mepolizumab in patients with inadequately-controlled severe eosinophilic asthma. Using a Bayesian network meta-analysis, 95% credible intervals and posterior probabilities were reported. Results: Of 19 indirect efficacy comparisons performed in base-case (Global Initiative for Asthma 4/5 patients with ≥2 exacerbations in the previous year) and overall populations, significant differences favoring reslizumab were observed for severe exacerbations, FEV1 at 4 weeks and eosinophil counts at 4, 16 and 24 weeks, with no other significant differences including risk of adverse events. Conclusion: Indirect comparison of reslizumab and mepolizumab largely showed no significant differences in efficacy or safety.

scholarly journals Reslizumab versus placebo for poorly controlled, severe eosinophilic asthma: Meta-analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 75 (9) ◽  
pp. 884-896
Author(s):  
Milos Milosavljevic ◽  
Slobodan Jankovic ◽  
Ana Pejcic ◽  
Jasmina Milovanovic ◽  
Valentina Opancina ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Recombinant Dna ◽  
Inhaled Corticosteroids ◽  
Therapeutic Option ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Blood Eosinophil ◽  
Life Questionnaire ◽  
Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Severe Eosinophilic Asthma

Background/Aim. Reslizumab is humanized monoclonal antibody produced by recombinant DNA technology which binds to circulating interleukin-5 (IL-5) and down-regulates the IL-5 signaling pathway. Reslizumab is indicated for the add-on maintenance treatment of patients 18 years and older with severe eosinophilic asthma phenotype whose symptoms were inadequately controlled with inhaled corticosteroids. The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the efficacy and safety of reslizumab compared to placebo in patients suffering from inadequately controlled, moderateto- severe asthma with elevated blood eosinophil counts. Methods. Our meta-analysis was based on systematic search of literature and selection of high-quality evidence according to pre-set inclusion and exclusion criteria. The effects of reslizumab and placebo were summarized using Review Manager (RevMan) 5.3.5 and heterogeneity was assessed by the Cochrane Q test and I? values. Several types of bias were assessed and publication bias shown by Funnel plot and Egger?s regression. Results. The meta-analysis included 5 randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials. Reslizumab 3.0 mg/kg produced substantial improvements in forced expiratory volume in 1. second (FEV 1) (mean difference 0.15 [0.10, 0.21]) and in forced vital capacity (FVC) (mean difference 0.21 [0.09, 0.32]) over the 15 or 16-week treatment period, substantial decrease versus placebo in Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) score (mean difference -0.28 [-0.41, -0.16]), and substantial increase vs. placebo from baseline in Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) total score (mean difference 0.24 [0.06, 0.43]). Also, reslizumab 3.0 mg/kg caused less adverse events versus placebo (OR 0.67 [0.51, 0.88]), especially asthma worsening (OR 0.53 [0.36, 0.77]) or bronchitis (OR 0.42 [0.24, 0.74]). Conclusion. On the basis of published clinical trials reslizumab could be considered as an effective and safe therapeutic option for severe, poorly controlled eosinophilic asthma for the time being.

scholarly journals Clinical and economic consequences of switching from omalizumab to mepolizumab in uncontrolled severe eosinophilic asthma

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Giovanna Elisiana Carpagnano ◽  
Emanuela Resta ◽  
Massimiliano Povero ◽  
Corrado Pelaia ◽  
Mariella D’Amato ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Disease Onset ◽  
National Health System ◽  
Healthcare Spending ◽  
Blood Eosinophil ◽  
Asthma Control Test ◽  
Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Exacerbation Rate ◽  
Serum Ige ◽  
Asthmatic Patients ◽  
Severe Eosinophilic Asthma

AbstractSevere asthma is burdened by frequent exacerbations and use of oral corticosteroids (OCS), which worsen patients’ health and increase healthcare spending. The aim of this study was to assess the clinical and economic impact of switching from omalizumab (OMA) to mepolizumab (MEP) in patients eligible for both biologics, but not optimally controlled by omalizumab. We retrospectively enrolled uncontrolled severe asthmatic patients who switched from OMA to MEP during the last two years. Information included blood eosinophil count, asthma control test (ACT), spirometry, serum IgE, fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO), OCS intake, drugs, exacerbations/hospitalizations, visits and diagnostic exams. Within the perspective of Italian National Health System, a pre- and post-MEP 12-month standardized total cost per patient was calculated. 33 patients were enrolled: five males, mean age 57 years, disease onset 24 years. At OMA discontinuation, 88% were OCS-dependent with annual mean rate of 4.0 clinically significant exacerbations, 0.30 exacerbations needing emergency room visits or hospitalization; absenteeism due to disease was 10.4 days per patient. Switch to MEP improved all clinical outcomes, reducing total exacerbation rate (RR = 0.06, 95% CI 0.03–0.14), OCS-dependent patients (OR = 0.02, 95% CI 0.005–0.08), and number of lost working days (Δ = − 7.9, 95% CI − 11.2 to − 4.6). Pulmonary function improved, serum IgE, FeNO and eosinophils decreased. Mean annual costs were €12,239 for OMA and €12,639 for MEP (Δ = €400, 95% CI − 1588–2389); the increment due to drug therapy (+ €1,581) was almost offset by savings regarding all other cost items (− €1,181). Patients with severe eosinophilic asthma, not controlled by OMA, experienced comprehensive benefits by switching to MEP with only slight increases in economic costs.

scholarly journals Clinical and Economic Consequences of Switching From Omalizumab to Mepolizumab in Uncontrolled Severe Eosinophilic Asthma: an Observational Retrospective Study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giovanna Elisiana Carpagnano ◽  
Emanuela Resta ◽  
Massimiliano Povero ◽  
Corrado Pelaia ◽  
Mariella D'Amato ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Nitric Oxide ◽  
Asthma Control ◽  
Exhaled Nitric Oxide ◽  
Blood Eosinophil ◽  
Fractional Exhaled Nitric Oxide ◽  
Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Exacerbation Rate ◽  
Serum Ige ◽  
Severe Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Oral Corticosteroids

Abstract Background: Severe asthma is burdened by frequent exacerbations and use of oral corticosteroids, which worsen patients’ health and increase healthcare spending. The aim of this study was to assess the clinical and economic impact of switching from omalizumab to mepolizumab in patients eligible for both biologics, but not optimally controlled by omalizumab.Methods: We retrospectively enrolled uncontrolled severe asthmatic patients, referred to seven asthma clinics in Italy, who switched from omalizumab to mepolizumab during the last two years. Clinical, functional, and laboratory information included blood eosinophil count, asthma control test, spirometry, serum IgE, fractional exhaled nitric oxide, oral corticosteroids intake, use of controller and rescue drugs, exacerbations/hospitalizations, visits and diagnostic exams. Within the perspective of Italian National Health System, a pre- and post-mepolizumab 12-month standardized total cost per patient was calculated.Results: 33 patients were enrolled: 5 males and 28 females, mean age 57 years, mean disease onset 24 years. At omalizumab discontinuation, 88% were oral corticosteroids-dependent with annual mean rate of 4.0 clinically significant exacerbations, 0.30 exacerbations needing emergency room visits or hospitalization; absenteeism due to disease was 10.4 days per patient. Switch to mepolizumab improved all clinical outcomes, reducing total exacerbation rate (RR = 0.06, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.14), oral corticosteroids -dependent patients (OR = 0.02, 95% CI 0.005 to 0.08), and the number of lost working days because of uncontrolled disease (Δ = -7.9, 95% CI -11.2 to -4.6). Pulmonary function improved, as well as serum IgE, fractional exhaled nitric oxide and eosinophils decreased. Mean annual costs were € 12,239 for omalizumab and € 12,639 for mepolizumab (Δ = € 400, 95% CI -1,588 to 2,389); the increment due to drug therapy (+ € 1,581) was almost offset by savings regarding all other cost items (- € 1,181). Conclusions: Patients with severe eosinophilic asthma, not controlled by omalizumab, experienced comprehensive benefits in asthma control by switching to mepolizumab. These relevant improvements were burdened by only very slight increases in economic costs.

scholarly journals Stopping versus continuing long-term mepolizumab treatment in severe eosinophilic asthma (COMET study)

2021 ◽  
pp. 2100396
Author(s):  
Wendy C. Moore ◽  
Oliver Kornmann ◽  
Marc Humbert ◽  
Claude Poirier ◽  
Elisabeth H. Bel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Asthma Control ◽  
Emergency Department Visit ◽  
Hazard Ratio ◽  
Blood Eosinophil ◽  
Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Severe Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Link Type ◽  
Clinically Significant

The long-term efficacy and safety of mepolizumab for treatment of severe eosinophilic asthma are well established. Here, we examine the clinical impact of stopping mepolizumab after long-term use.COMET (NCT02555371) was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicenter study. Patients who had completed COLUMBA (NCT01691859) or COSMEX (NCT02135692) and received continuous mepolizumab treatment for ≥3 years were randomised 1:1 to stop (switch to placebo) or continue subcutaneous mepolizumab 100 mg every 4 weeks for 52 weeks. Primary endpoint: time to first clinically significant exacerbation; secondary endpoints: time to first exacerbation requiring hospitalisation/emergency department visit, time to decrease in asthma control (≥0.5-point increase in Asthma Control Questionnaire-5 score from COMET baseline), and blood eosinophil count ratio to COMET baseline. Safety was assessed.Patients stopping (n=151) versus continuing (n=144) mepolizumab had significantly shorter times to first clinically significant exacerbation (hazard ratio: 1.61 [95% confidence interval: 1.17,2.22]; p=0.004) and decrease in asthma control (hazard ratio: 1.52 [1.13,2.02]; p=0.005), and higher blood eosinophil counts at Week 52 (270 versus 40 cells·µL−1; ratio [stopping versus continuing]: 6.19 [4.89, 7.83]; p<0.001). Differences in efficacy outcomes between groups were observed when assessed from Week 12 (16 weeks after last mepolizumab dose). Exacerbations requiring hospitalisation/emergency department visit were rare. Adverse events in patients continuing mepolizumab were consistent with previous studies. For patients who stopped mepolizumab, the safety profile was consistent with other eosinophilic asthma populations.Patients who stopped mepolizumab had an increase in exacerbations and reduced asthma control versus those who continued.

scholarly journals Precision medicine applications for severe asthma

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 117-135
Author(s):  
Orit Gourgy Hacohen ◽  
Shai Cohen
Keyword(s):  
Precision Medicine ◽  
Severe Asthma ◽  
Oral Corticosteroid ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Blood Eosinophil ◽  
Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Severe Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Beneficial Effects ◽  
New Treatment

Asthma is a heterogeneous condition in which multiple pathological pathways manifest with similar symptoms. Severe asthma (SA) is challenging to manage and comprises a significant health and economic burden. Many studies have been conducted in an attempt to define different clinical phenotypes that translate into biological endotypes, with the goal of tailoring treatment based on precision medicine. This review summarizes the current evidence for the treatments of SA, and in particular, the biologic treatments that are currently available: omalizumab, mepolizumab, reslizumab, benralizumab and dupilumab. We found only limited high-quality direct evidence regarding treatment with anti-IgE (omalizumab) in SA patients. Data regarding anti-interleukin (IL)-5 (mepolizumab, reslizumab and benralizumab) showed beneficial effects in severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA) with different levels of blood eosinophils used in clinical trials. Dupilumab, anti-IL-4/IL-13, was shown to be effective in SEA and is the only agent currently FDA-approved for the indication of oral corticosteroid dependent asthma, regardless of the blood eosinophil level. This review also summarizes the existing knowledge regarding the characteristics of the patient who may respond to the different therapies. As of today, more studies are needed to better understand the diverse mechanisms that underlie SA phenotypes. We have not yet adequately reached the goal of precision medicine. Additional studies are necessary in order to find novel surrogate markers that can predict the response to a specific biologic therapy, especially in patients who are oral corticosteroid dependent. In addition, efforts must be invested into research looking for new treatment options for patients with non-type-2 inflammation SA. Statement of novelty: we review the current evidence regarding tailored treatment therapies in SA, with a particular focus on the knowledge regarding patient selection for specific biologic treatments.

Mepolizumab Is an Effective Option in Severe Eosinophilic Asthma Regardless of Baseline Features: Single-Center Real-Life Data

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Betül Özdel Öztürk ◽  
Zeynep Yavuz ◽  
Dilek Eraslan ◽  
Dilşad Mungan ◽  
Yavuz Selim Demirel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Blood Eosinophil ◽  
Life Questionnaire ◽  
Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Quality Of Life Questionnaire ◽  
Severe Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Median Dosage ◽  
Act Score

<b><i>Background:</i></b> Mepolizumab has been approved as a treatment option for severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA) patients in our country. We aimed to evaluate the clinical and functional efficacy of mepolizumab in this group of patients in real life as well as the response rates to mepolizumab and the possible factors affecting the response. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> The study was a retrospective chart review of patients with SEA treated with mepolizumab. The data were collected at baseline, and at the 6th and 12th month. <b><i>Results:</i></b> A total of 62 patients (41F/21M) with a mean age of 44.41 ± 13.24 years were included in the study. They had poor symptom control with a mean asthma control test (ACT) score of 16.61 ± 5.59, frequent exacerbations with a mean of 3.4 ± 3.7 in the previous 12 months, and 80.6% required daily oral corticosteroid (OCS) with a median dosage of 8 mg/day as methylprednisolone. The ACT score increased to 22.47 ± 3.18 and 22.03 ± 4.31, respectively, and blood eosinophil count decreased from 1,146/μL to 89/μL and 85/μL at the 6th and 12th month, respectively. The mean FEV1 at baseline was 2.102 L there was an increase of 0.373 L at 6th month and 0.596 L at 12th month. The percentage of regular users of OCS decreased to 66.0% at 6th month with a median dosage of 4 mg and 52.6% at 12th month with a median dosage of 2 mg. Mepolizumab reduced the rate of exacerbations compared with the previous year from a mean of 3.40 to 0.15 at 6th month and 0.36 at 12th month. There was a significant improvement in Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ), Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ), and Sino-nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) scores at both of time points. The rate of responders and super-responders at 6th month was 60% and 28%, respectively, and consequently, the overall response rate was 88%. At the 12th month, the super-responder rate increased to 44.7% as well as the overall response to 89.4%. The only difference between the nonresponders, responders, and super-responders at the 6th and 12th month was whether regular daily OCS was used pre-mepolizumab. All nonresponders at both 6th and 12th month were using OCS regularly, whereas most of super-responder used the OCS only during exacerbations. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> Mepolizumab effectively reduced asthma exacerbations, steroid requirement, blood eosinophil counts and improved asthma control, pulmonary function, sinonasal symptoms and quality of life. Our data suggest that mepolizumab would be effective in selected patients in real-life settings.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document